Whispers Forum — 10 Aug 2018
DEBATE
These days bureaucrats know their future is not as per contribution to society but it is shaped by politicians.
Vandita
Return of the Natives
As mentioned in Whispers now many diplomats are happy leaving their postings abroad and working in the MEA. The reason is that IFS officers by and large are an intelligent lot. India has more than 150 embassies. In most of them, there is no work of any consequence. Introduction of evisa has made many consulates redundant. The only reason why an intelligent officer will like to be posted as an Ambassador in an unimportant country is that allowances are very good. Many countries – including countries with global reach like USA and UK - are cutting budget of their embassies. But only few embassies are being closed. Israel and Singapore are two countries who have modernised diplomacy. Foreign office officials in these countries are designated Ambassadors to unimportant countries. India and Venezuela lead the world in posting more than a hundred Ambassadors with no work. In a globalised world, the best brains in the country need to be used for formulating and implementing foreign policy and coordinating with other ministries and state governments. It is a tragedy that they are being used around the world for nothing other than protocol and alcohol.
Prof N C Saxena
Ideal age of retirement
It is the human psychology that prevents a man from withdrawing from his worldly affairs irrespective of his advancing age , deteriorating physique ,lack of concentration and absence of responsive skills since the death no doubt he assumes imminent but for others. The demand for enhancing the retirement age to 62 years for Government employees, 67 years for Supreme Court and 65 for High Courts etc. etc. is based on the justification of above analogy. It sans all merits and emanates only from interested quarters. Firstly the concept of prescribing different retiring age for different category of functionaries is discriminatory and thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution that prescribe equality before law. What is the logic or rationale that guarantees a Judge to superannuate at 67 years if he enters the Apex Court but must quit at 62 if the Judges belong to High Courts. However a bureaucrat must superannuate at 60 as his office files stops listening to him thereafter. No amount of argument can substantiate the spirit of actions and their purity in finalizing such benchmarking. If the 60 plus age defuncts a bureaucrat from the realm or thought process of decision making so as it would logically impact the Judge of his capacity of appreciation of the circumstances of the case and also the interpretational skills as the process of aging being uniform derecognize the culture of privilege. Of course the outcome of the process shall be subject to exceptions and that again will be subject to prescribed Medical standards and Medical scrutiny of each individual. While no doubt the life expectancy in India as also all over the globe has increased given the medical advancement or medical breakthrough, the fact can not be denied that a major portion of productive time at 60 or plus is devoted or spent by the Seniors(citizen) in tackling health issues at the Hospitals. Be it replacement of knee joints, diabetes, hypertension etc etc at the cost of exchequer .Whereas the medical expenses are taken care of by the government even after retirement , the salary and perquisites that are normally at its peak at the stage of about to retire are paid without his performance. People shouting from the roof tops for enhancing the age of superannuation are bereft of substance or data to prove the desirable standards of fitness of a government official /judges at the age of beyond the existing retirement age. They all must realize that the country is manifest with the problem of unemployment and unless the seniors are forced to vacate the youngsters remain deprived of their genuine right to occupy the seats wrongfully held by their otherwise retired seniors. Similarly the government of the day must stop offering post retirement placements in the government to one and all by offering such positions/posts to the talented and believe it India has no dearth of it. Such a move by the Government shall yield all round applause and be a further step in protecting the Exchequer from unjustified and unhealthy financial burden that gets inflicted by payment of maximum salary to the officials at the or after the age of their retirement. Let the Government put 60 years as the age of superannuation for one and all including the Judges of High Courts or Supreme Court.
O P Sharma
These days bureaucrats know their future is not as per contribution to society but it is shaped by politicians.
Vandita
Return of the Natives
As mentioned in Whispers now many diplomats are happy leaving their postings abroad and working in the MEA. The reason is that IFS officers by and large are an intelligent lot. India has more than 150 embassies. In most of them, there is no work of any consequence. Introduction of evisa has made many consulates redundant. The only reason why an intelligent officer will like to be posted as an Ambassador in an unimportant country is that allowances are very good. Many countries – including countries with global reach like USA and UK - are cutting budget of their embassies. But only few embassies are being closed. Israel and Singapore are two countries who have modernised diplomacy. Foreign office officials in these countries are designated Ambassadors to unimportant countries. India and Venezuela lead the world in posting more than a hundred Ambassadors with no work. In a globalised world, the best brains in the country need to be used for formulating and implementing foreign policy and coordinating with other ministries and state governments. It is a tragedy that they are being used around the world for nothing other than protocol and alcohol.
Prof N C Saxena
Ideal age of retirement
It is the human psychology that prevents a man from withdrawing from his worldly affairs irrespective of his advancing age , deteriorating physique ,lack of concentration and absence of responsive skills since the death no doubt he assumes imminent but for others. The demand for enhancing the retirement age to 62 years for Government employees, 67 years for Supreme Court and 65 for High Courts etc. etc. is based on the justification of above analogy. It sans all merits and emanates only from interested quarters. Firstly the concept of prescribing different retiring age for different category of functionaries is discriminatory and thus violative of Article 14 of the Constitution that prescribe equality before law. What is the logic or rationale that guarantees a Judge to superannuate at 67 years if he enters the Apex Court but must quit at 62 if the Judges belong to High Courts. However a bureaucrat must superannuate at 60 as his office files stops listening to him thereafter. No amount of argument can substantiate the spirit of actions and their purity in finalizing such benchmarking. If the 60 plus age defuncts a bureaucrat from the realm or thought process of decision making so as it would logically impact the Judge of his capacity of appreciation of the circumstances of the case and also the interpretational skills as the process of aging being uniform derecognize the culture of privilege. Of course the outcome of the process shall be subject to exceptions and that again will be subject to prescribed Medical standards and Medical scrutiny of each individual. While no doubt the life expectancy in India as also all over the globe has increased given the medical advancement or medical breakthrough, the fact can not be denied that a major portion of productive time at 60 or plus is devoted or spent by the Seniors(citizen) in tackling health issues at the Hospitals. Be it replacement of knee joints, diabetes, hypertension etc etc at the cost of exchequer .Whereas the medical expenses are taken care of by the government even after retirement , the salary and perquisites that are normally at its peak at the stage of about to retire are paid without his performance. People shouting from the roof tops for enhancing the age of superannuation are bereft of substance or data to prove the desirable standards of fitness of a government official /judges at the age of beyond the existing retirement age. They all must realize that the country is manifest with the problem of unemployment and unless the seniors are forced to vacate the youngsters remain deprived of their genuine right to occupy the seats wrongfully held by their otherwise retired seniors. Similarly the government of the day must stop offering post retirement placements in the government to one and all by offering such positions/posts to the talented and believe it India has no dearth of it. Such a move by the Government shall yield all round applause and be a further step in protecting the Exchequer from unjustified and unhealthy financial burden that gets inflicted by payment of maximum salary to the officials at the or after the age of their retirement. Let the Government put 60 years as the age of superannuation for one and all including the Judges of High Courts or Supreme Court.
O P Sharma
